Bug 429173
Summary: | gphoto2 can't communicate with Canon PowerShot S400 - how to fix | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | David A. De Graaf <dad> |
Component: | gphoto2 | Assignee: | Jindrich Novy <jnovy> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 8 | CC: | harald, pknirsch |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2009-01-09 07:35:47 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
David A. De Graaf
2008-01-17 18:44:19 UTC
There shouldn't be problem in increasing the timeout value in gphoto2. Harald, do the proposed changes in udev make sense? Is it possible to add them? MODE="0666" does not make sense.. either pam_console or PolicyKit should grant you access to the devices. pam_console ??? You're kidding. Right? PolicyKit ??? $ man PolicyKit No manual entry for PolicyKit $ whereis PolicyKit PolicyKit not found in normal places $ apropos PolicyKit PolicyKit: nothing appropriate # yum list available "PolicyKit*" ... Error: No matching Packages to list I've tried to ignore pam_console ever since it reared its ugly head a few years ago. Now you've forced me to read about it. What an ugly concept. The basic premise is just so totally out of place in a Linux world - "designed to give users at the physical console ... capabilities that they would not otherwise have, and to take those capabilities away when the are no longer logged in at the console." My computer is physically under my control. In fact, the entire machine sits on my lap - it's a laptop. All my computers are under my direct physical control. Yes, I can and do sometimes log in with different userids at the same time on different consoles or even X servers, and I do not want the computer to restrict whether certain devices can be used. If another user does something annoying I'll slap his wrist. Oh wait. That'd be me slapping myself. Duh! The default behaviour must be to allow all use that isn't disastrous. Pam_console's premise is to restrict all use except that which is enumerated. That's dumb. What purpose is served when a camera is plugged in to a USB port by allowing access to one userid and disallowing access to another? I'd like to get rid of this entire hare-brained mountain of confusion and restriction and just allow unfettered use of all capabilities. Any suggestions? # yum info PolicyKit Installed Packages Name : PolicyKit Arch : x86_64 Version: 0.6 Release: 1.fc8 Size : 181 k Repo : installed Summary: Toolkit for privilege control Description: PolicyKit is a toolkit for defining and handling the policy that allows unprivileged processes to speak to privileged processes. See also: http://www.harald-hoyer.de/linux/console_acls_for_palm My Powershot A400 doesn't work in Fedora9 either in normal mode or ptp mode for presumably the same reasons as this doesn't work in f8. It worked in fc6, eventually in fc7 and now fails in f9. The actual message is Error initializing camera: -114: OS error in camera communication This camera is identified as Canon Digital Camera idVendor=04a9, idProduct=30b7 Hmm, Bug 443515 suggests that this might be fixed with gphoto2 2.4.1. (I just noticed that the gphoto2 is suffixed fc7; is this right?!) Hmm, gphoto2-2.4.2 should have fixed that since it contains many of Canon-related fixes. Could you please try with the rawhide gphoto2? This message is a reminder that Fedora 8 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 8. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '8'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 8's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 8 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |